Monday, Sep 27, 2004 at 12:34
Well my response was mainly for AndrewX and his comment about toyota’s many features which put them so far ahead of the others. Poor deluded fellow :-).
I regurlarly LMAO at the ego of Toyota drivers. They probably are the best vehicle in their respective markets but "so far" ahead they are not and value for money is my point.
Challengers are not hardcore 4wd’s and don't come with a hardcore price tag. If you bought one for that purpose then clearly the money would’ve been better spent on a cruiser or patrol initially.
If you want to go hardcore then buy the best and pay the premium. But if don’t need the extra 20% capability why pay for something you will never use. I am sure 90% of landcruiser drivers only use maybe 50% of their vehicles capability, but they feeling happy knowing that they have it their, and telling other people all about it.
Twice the price was poetic liscence but I bought my 98 challenger with a lot of fruit and in immaculate condition for 22 grand. Here are a couple of equivalent age and kilometre Toyotas I grabbed from a website
1998 LANDCRUISER PRADO
WAS $38,990
NOW $35,990
1997 LANDCRUISER GXL
WAS $34,990
NOW $32,990
Sure you will find cheaper but you be the judge. Throw into that running costs, the challenger was recently found by the NRMA to be the cheapest midsize 4wd to run, around $207 dollars a week from memory, prado’s around 220 and cruisers around 260.
While you may have the most capable vehicle if you don’t use it then you are really just pouring money down the drain, or into your ego. You don’t need a landcruiser to drive gravel roads or down the beach for a picnic.
I don’t have a problem with Toyota, I would buy one tomorrow if I needed the extra capability. I just don’t think they are “so far ahead” as their price tag suggests, or their owners like to brag about. Everything comes at a price, something which Toyota owners seem blissfully ignorant of.
Cookie.
FollowupID:
337515